September 2019 - VoiceOps - lists.voiceops.org

ANIs flagged as telemarketer/spammer/scammer
by abalashov＠evaristesys.com Nov. 14, 2021

Nov. 14, 2021

Hi, So, of course, it is a known problem in the legitimate side of the lead engagement call centre, survey, etc. business that ANIs get flagged as "telemarketer" pretty quickly and start showing up that way on people's phones. Your normative viewpoint on that may vary depending on what you think of lead gen calls, but regardless, a reasonable person would differentiate between: (1) Legitimate outbound dialing operations that are following up with leads who provided their phone number and agreed to be called (at least, as a matter of clicking "accept" on _something_), or for some other legitimate mass-dialing purpose, and who actually own the DID inventory from which they present local-market ANIs and can in fact be reached on those numbers; (2) Illegal spammers who use fake ANIs and call people who did not in any way consent to being called by them. I am trying to learn a bit more about how this is done and what a legitimate, above-board business can do about it. Ignoring the factor of third-party call-screening apps (which most people with a mobile don't use), where is this generally implemented? As I understand it, T-Mobile do it on the network level. I have T-Mobile myself, and probably 2/3rds of unfamiliar numbers, including quite legitimate ones, show up as "Scam Likely" ? I know that's come up on the list before. AT&T displays "Telemarketer"; do they do it that way too, or do they use a Google Android feature for that which they enable as part of their carrier defaults for carrier-issued phones? What about other carriers and Android? As far as I know, Apple don't do anything like this. Do people with iPhones just not receive this "service"? How does that work? Asking where the central, or the most influential authority lies and who provides it goes to the heart of the real question, which is: what can a legitimate business do if their number has been blacklisted this way? As I understand it, the maintainers of these lists, along with the criteria for getting on them, are elusive and inscrutable, and there's really no recourse and no appeals process. I furthermore understand that this has led to the widespread approach of rotating ANIs, but that's a losing battle; they get flagged too. I imagine it won't be long before the criteria for "Scam Likely" are just "number appears to call lots of numbers in this rate centre and otherwise hasn't been around very long". But this is all just conjecture on my part; I really don't know much about how my carrier, anyone's carrier, or some BigCo that's behind my mobile OS decides that a call is a "telemarketer" or "scam" call. If anyone can shed some light on how this really works and what, if anything can be done about it, I would be most appreciative. -- Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC Tel: +1-706-510-6800 / +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/

8 14

Connecting to Remote Tandems
by voiceops＠ics-il.net July 9, 2021

July 9, 2021

I'm evaluating methods of extending our footprint. I purposely left out company names. One of the companies we talked to was really only interested in getting us the inbound long distance calls, not the local ones. Well, they would, but the terms were vastly different. Given that I still need to build out to connect to the local tandem, what's the point in using a third party to connect to long distance? Are the terms for connecting to the local tandems different because the access tandem is simpler, whereas the local tandem could potentially involve connections to a bunch of other switches, once volume dictated I needed direct connections... and they don't want to deal with that? Are there third parties that don't have vastly different terms for local tandem services? Also, is it likely that I just don't understand what's going on? I went circles with the sales rep to make sure I understood what he was saying, but I could be wrong. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

5 24

ATT Toll-Free Database Capacity
by geoff.mina＠ringcentral.com Sept. 17, 2019

Sept. 17, 2019

Greetings, I have a vendor (BlueTone out of NY) that is claiming that the ATT Toll-Free Database has reached capacity and ATT is asking all resellers and customers to delete translations for anything that is producing material volume or CIC'd entirely to ATT. Can anyone on the list confirm this - or are they just trying to strong arm us into allocating more traffic (which is what I assume) Thanks, Geoff

1 0

Verizon Business CNAM admin
by alex.lopez＠opsys.com Sept. 16, 2019

Sept. 16, 2019

Does anyone on this list have a contact method for asking VZ business to update a CNAM record? It appears correct on every API I can query but on any number that VZ terminates it appears incorrectly.

2 2

TDS Telecom XSP?
by kim＠winther.dk Sept. 10, 2019

Sept. 10, 2019

Hello Anyone here from TDS who can help us find out what XSP address 3rd parties (such as my Call Control for BroadWorks app) should use? Best regards Kim -- Kim Winther Developer, etc - Office: +45 87370407 - Mobile: +45 53574760

1 0

VoiceOps Digest, Vol 121, Issue 4
by kuylenj＠eastex.com Sept. 9, 2019

Sept. 9, 2019

We have a form that the customer takes to the Sheriff's Office that basically says " I 'customer' do hereby request that Telco identify the source of calls that happened at date/time. I authorize and agree not to hold telco to any claims, demands, other legalese, etc." The customer signs it and has the sheriff or deputy sign and are given a reference number. We then call or fax the information to the Sheriff after the customer brings us back the form and performs a Caller Originated Trace. We absolutely under no circumstances give information directly to the customer. -----Original Message----- From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of voiceops-request at voiceops.org Sent: Monday, September 9, 2019 1:13 PM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: VoiceOps Digest, Vol 121, Issue 4 Send VoiceOps mailing list submissions to voiceops at voiceops.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_mailma… or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to voiceops-request at voiceops.org You can reach the person managing the list at voiceops-owner at voiceops.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of VoiceOps digest..." Important/Confidential: This communication and any files or documents attached to it are intended only for the use of the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed. It contains information that may be confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, you are hereby notified that the copying, disclosure, distribution, storage, retransmission or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication by mistake, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all forms of this communication (electronic or paper).

1 0

Disclosing Restricted Caller ID to customer
by nick＠floridavirtualsolutions.com Sept. 9, 2019

Sept. 9, 2019

Greetings all, Had an interesting case come up today that I wanted some feedback on. Customer called claiming they had been receiving harassing calls to their business number, But the calls were caller ID blocked (Caller likely dialed *67 before the call). I found the CDR's for the call in question, And sure enough "Anonymous" <Restricted> was the displayed Calling number and CNAM. Out of curiosity, I went and pulled the capture of the same call from Homer. And sure enough, The actual calling number is delivered in the Remote-Party-ID field, With Privacy=full. Obviously, The caller asked for... and expected that data to be private. What's everyones thoughts on the legality of disclosing that information to my customer receiving the call? Would you provide it on request to the end user? Or limit that information only if requested by legal request? (Court order or request from law enforcement) *Nick Olsen* Network Engineer Office: 321-408-5000 x103 Mobile: 321-794-0763

4 8

Ringing problems
by peeip989＠gmail.com Sept. 5, 2019

Sept. 5, 2019

We have recently gotten several complaints about not getting, or severely abbreviated ringback. The first few examples we were able to trace back to a carrier and believe it is because the call sets up with 183 Session Progress w/SDP and <1 second later get a 180 Ringing and the audible ringing stops. We heard a similar complaint in Europe last with an EU carrier. And again today with yet another US (global) provider. So, my questions are: 1- Anyone else seeing this? If so, what's your workaround/fix? 2- Since this is not contained to a single carrier, anyone aware of an SBC or softswitch maker recently released code that might be causing? Thanks, Pete

3 2